Possible misconceptions about (strong) longtermism - EA Forum

OVERVIEW In this post I provide a brief sketch of The case for strong longtermism as put forward by Greaves and MacAskill, and proceed to raise and address possible misconceptions that people may hav…

RogerAckroyd 5y 20 0 0 It is not obvious that non-extinction is an attractor state. If there is some minimal background risk of extinction that we can not get below (whether due to asteroids, false vacuum decay, nuclear war, everyone becoming a negative utilitarian and stops reproducing, whatever) then it is the nature of exponential discounting that the very long-term future can quickly become essentially unimportant. Reply

related reading

• Why I am not a longtermist – Windows On Theorywindowsontheory.org
• A Case Against Strong Longtermism | Vaden Masranivmasrani.github.io
• Longtermism Is Surprisingly Obviousbenthams.substack.com
• Understanding "longtermism": Why this suddenly influential philosophy is so toxic - Salon.comsalon.com
• Longtermism: An Introduction | Effective Altruismeffectivealtruism.org
• Effective altruism’s most controversial ideavox.com
• ⚡️ Towards Ineffective Altruismreboothq.substack.com
• Intro to Longtermism - Fin Moorhousefinmoorhouse.com
• Longtermism - Wikipediaen.wikipedia.org
• Burkean Longtermismforourposterity.com
• Why I am probably not a longtermist — EA Forumforum.effectivealtruism.org
• The Dangerous Ideas of “Longtermism” and “Existential Risk”currentaffairs.org